[Area 4] Comments from Mr. Kavouss Arasteh (GAC, ICG)

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Hi James,

You're not the first to advance the Runaway Board (or Recalcitrant 
Board) thesis. See the BC's "Stress Tests" and some contributions by our 
WG4 colleagues. I'm not sure if the intentional acts of the incumbent 
contractor completely define our problem, for instance, see my note 
earlier today on compromise or loss of some resource critical to some 
existing (or hypothetical) accounting process -- e.g., crypto keys or 
authentication credentials for documents and/or employees.

Regards,
Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon

On 12/18/14 5:41 PM, James M. Bladel wrote:
> Hello WG4 team:
>
> I recognize that there have been several attempts to catalog the 
> various scenarios and situations that would benefit from improved 
> accountability mechanisms.  But as a conversation starter, I would 
> propose that there are really only two contingencies:
>
>    * The ICANN Board takes action that is opposed by a significant 
> majority (or unanimously) of stakeholders (SO/AC), or
>    * The ICANN Board refuses to take action despite significant 
> support (or unanimity) of stakeholders (SO/AC).
>
> It's my opinion that addressing these two over-arching contingencies 
> will naturally sweep up nearly all other scenarios.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks---
>
> J.
>
>
> From: Grace Abuhamad <grace.abuhamad at icann.org 
> <mailto:grace.abuhamad at icann.org>>
> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 at 19:00
> To: ccwg-accountability4 <ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org 
> <mailto:ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org>>
> Subject: [Area 4] Comments from Mr. Kavouss Arasteh (GAC, ICG)
>
> Dear all,
>
> Here attached is Mr. Arasteh's first contribution to the work of the 
> CCWG-Accountability as he shared on the main mailing list on 15 
> December. Below I've copied an excerpt of his document that relates to 
> WA4.
>
> 2.4Working Group 4
>
> This scope of work of this Group is to identify contingencies 
> (especially in relation with WS1)
>
> The above-mentioned scope is quite vague and ambiguous
>
>
>
> Best,
> Grace
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-accountability4 mailing list
> Ccwg-accountability4 at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-accountability4

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-accountability4/attachments/20141218/3df9103a/attachment-0001.html>